Publicatie
Publication date
Candida auris in Dutch hospitals: are we ready for it?
Dix, L.M.L., Notermans, D.W., Schneeberger, C., Dijk, K. van. Candida auris in Dutch hospitals: are we ready for it? Journal of Hospital Infection: 2025, 156, p. 106-112.
Read online
Background
Candida auris can cause nosocomial outbreaks and provides challenges concerning diagnosis, treatment, eradication and infection prevention. There are no Dutch standards or guidelines for C. auris, and current hospital practices are unknown. Therefore, we assessed whether Dutch hospitals are prepared for C. auris introduction.
Methods
An online questionnaire concerning screening, diagnostics, infection prevention and outbreaks was distributed amongst medical microbiologists and infection prevention practitioners in spring 2024.
Findings
Fifty-two questionnaires were processed comprising 58 hospitals. Most participants (60%) did not screen for C. auris carriership and 51% did not have a protocol describing screening procedures. Healthcare workers were rarely screened. Screening sites and number of swabs varied. All respondents would place a patient with C. auris in isolation, 71% had a protocol describing isolation measures. Most hospitals took extra cleaning precautions after finding C. auris. None of the hospitals ever had a C. auris-outbreak, 29% had an outbreak protocol. Procedures to cease isolation were present in 31%, but 10% never declare a patient C. auris-free. A diagnostic protocol (available in 53%) was primarily based on culture, but the execution differed. Molecular diagnostics were rarely used (12%). The majority did not screen nor did they have a protocol describing multi-drug-resistant candida outbreak coordination.
Conclusions
Screening, diagnostics, infection prevention, control and outbreak management of C. auris vary amongst Dutch hospitals, and most are not fully prepared for C. auris. As inadequate preparation for C. auris is an international concern, guidance documents could aid in fulfilling this need.
Candida auris can cause nosocomial outbreaks and provides challenges concerning diagnosis, treatment, eradication and infection prevention. There are no Dutch standards or guidelines for C. auris, and current hospital practices are unknown. Therefore, we assessed whether Dutch hospitals are prepared for C. auris introduction.
Methods
An online questionnaire concerning screening, diagnostics, infection prevention and outbreaks was distributed amongst medical microbiologists and infection prevention practitioners in spring 2024.
Findings
Fifty-two questionnaires were processed comprising 58 hospitals. Most participants (60%) did not screen for C. auris carriership and 51% did not have a protocol describing screening procedures. Healthcare workers were rarely screened. Screening sites and number of swabs varied. All respondents would place a patient with C. auris in isolation, 71% had a protocol describing isolation measures. Most hospitals took extra cleaning precautions after finding C. auris. None of the hospitals ever had a C. auris-outbreak, 29% had an outbreak protocol. Procedures to cease isolation were present in 31%, but 10% never declare a patient C. auris-free. A diagnostic protocol (available in 53%) was primarily based on culture, but the execution differed. Molecular diagnostics were rarely used (12%). The majority did not screen nor did they have a protocol describing multi-drug-resistant candida outbreak coordination.
Conclusions
Screening, diagnostics, infection prevention, control and outbreak management of C. auris vary amongst Dutch hospitals, and most are not fully prepared for C. auris. As inadequate preparation for C. auris is an international concern, guidance documents could aid in fulfilling this need.
Background
Candida auris can cause nosocomial outbreaks and provides challenges concerning diagnosis, treatment, eradication and infection prevention. There are no Dutch standards or guidelines for C. auris, and current hospital practices are unknown. Therefore, we assessed whether Dutch hospitals are prepared for C. auris introduction.
Methods
An online questionnaire concerning screening, diagnostics, infection prevention and outbreaks was distributed amongst medical microbiologists and infection prevention practitioners in spring 2024.
Findings
Fifty-two questionnaires were processed comprising 58 hospitals. Most participants (60%) did not screen for C. auris carriership and 51% did not have a protocol describing screening procedures. Healthcare workers were rarely screened. Screening sites and number of swabs varied. All respondents would place a patient with C. auris in isolation, 71% had a protocol describing isolation measures. Most hospitals took extra cleaning precautions after finding C. auris. None of the hospitals ever had a C. auris-outbreak, 29% had an outbreak protocol. Procedures to cease isolation were present in 31%, but 10% never declare a patient C. auris-free. A diagnostic protocol (available in 53%) was primarily based on culture, but the execution differed. Molecular diagnostics were rarely used (12%). The majority did not screen nor did they have a protocol describing multi-drug-resistant candida outbreak coordination.
Conclusions
Screening, diagnostics, infection prevention, control and outbreak management of C. auris vary amongst Dutch hospitals, and most are not fully prepared for C. auris. As inadequate preparation for C. auris is an international concern, guidance documents could aid in fulfilling this need.
Candida auris can cause nosocomial outbreaks and provides challenges concerning diagnosis, treatment, eradication and infection prevention. There are no Dutch standards or guidelines for C. auris, and current hospital practices are unknown. Therefore, we assessed whether Dutch hospitals are prepared for C. auris introduction.
Methods
An online questionnaire concerning screening, diagnostics, infection prevention and outbreaks was distributed amongst medical microbiologists and infection prevention practitioners in spring 2024.
Findings
Fifty-two questionnaires were processed comprising 58 hospitals. Most participants (60%) did not screen for C. auris carriership and 51% did not have a protocol describing screening procedures. Healthcare workers were rarely screened. Screening sites and number of swabs varied. All respondents would place a patient with C. auris in isolation, 71% had a protocol describing isolation measures. Most hospitals took extra cleaning precautions after finding C. auris. None of the hospitals ever had a C. auris-outbreak, 29% had an outbreak protocol. Procedures to cease isolation were present in 31%, but 10% never declare a patient C. auris-free. A diagnostic protocol (available in 53%) was primarily based on culture, but the execution differed. Molecular diagnostics were rarely used (12%). The majority did not screen nor did they have a protocol describing multi-drug-resistant candida outbreak coordination.
Conclusions
Screening, diagnostics, infection prevention, control and outbreak management of C. auris vary amongst Dutch hospitals, and most are not fully prepared for C. auris. As inadequate preparation for C. auris is an international concern, guidance documents could aid in fulfilling this need.